Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective

Ustarz, Yazidu; Fanta, Ashenafi Beyene Article Financial development and economic growth in subSaharan Africa: A sectoral perspective Cogent Economics & Finance Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Ustarz, Yazidu; Fanta, Ashenafi Beyene (2021) : Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective, Cogent Economics & Finance, ISSN 2332-2039, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 9, Iss. 1, pp. 1-21, https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/270104 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaef20 Cogent Economics & Finance ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaef20 Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective Yazidu Ustarz & Ashenafi Beyene Fanta | To cite this article: Yazidu Ustarz & Ashenafi Beyene Fanta | (2021) Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective, Cogent Economics & Finance, 9:1, 1934976, DOI: 10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 © 2021 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license. Published online: 07 Jun 2021. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 4142 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 6 View citing articles GENERAL & APPLIED ECONOMICS | RESEARCH ARTICLE Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective Yazidu Ustarz 1 * and Ashenafi Beyene Fanta 1 Abstract: Research on the impact of financial development on economic growth remains inconclusive. Previous empirical examination of the link is based on aggregate GDP on the presumption that each economic sector responds identically to financial development. However, the extent of credit utilisation, as well as productivity of credit, may not necessarily remain the same across sectors. This study therefore seeks to contribute to the literature by examining the effect of financial development across sectors in sub-Saharan Africa using the Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) over the period 1990–2018. Indeed, the findings show that while financial development has a positive effect on the service and agricultural sectors, a certain threshold of financial development must be reached before it can positively contribute to the growth of the industrial sector. The findings are robust to a different estimation technique. With the industrial sector considered critical for economic transformation, our findings imply that policymakers in subSaharan Africa need to continue to promote financial development to spur industrialization. Subjects: Economics; Finance; Business, Management and Accounting Keywords: financial development; threshold; generalised method of moments; seemingly unrelated regression; sub-Saharan Africa ABOUT THE AUTHOR Mr Yazidu Ustarz is a PhD candidate at the University of Stellenbosch Business School, South Africa. He is also a lecturer at the University for Development Studies in Ghana. Mr Ustarz holds an MPhil degree in Finance from the University of Ghana Business School. His research interests include financial development, volatility and foreign capital inflows. Dr Ashenafi Beyene Fanta is a Senior Lecturer of Development Finance at the University of Stellenbosch Business School. Dr Fanta has published widely in a number of scholarly journals and has delivered papers at international conferences. His research interests include financial development, SME finance, financial inclusion and corporate governance. Dr Fanta holds a doctoral degree in Social and Economic Sciences (Corporate Finance) from the Johannes Kepler University of Linz in Austria and a Master’s degree in Accounting and Finance from Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia. PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT The finance–growth nexus has been extensively examined within the context of sub-Saharan Africa. The results, however, remain complex and inconclusive. This paper seeks to contribute to the literature by examining whether the impact of financial development in sub-Saharan Africa varies across different sectors of the economy. The findings show that financial development has a positive impact on the growth of the service and agricultural sectors. In the case of the industrial sector, the initial impact is negative, but becomes positive after reaching a certain threshold. The results suggest that policymakers in sub-Saharan Africa need to continue to promote financial development to spur industrialisation. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 1 of 21 Received: 8 December 2020 Accepted: 24 May 2021 *Corresponding author: Yazidu Ustarz, Stellenbosch University Business School, Carl Cronje Drive, Bellville 7530, Cape Town, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] Reviewing editor: Wai Ching Poon, Economics, Monash University - Malaysia Campus, MALAYSIA Additional information is available at the end of the article © 2021 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license. 1. Introduction The finance–growth nexus has long been a subject of interest among practitioners and policymakers (Acaravci, 2009; Elijah & Hamza, 2019; Ibrahim & Alagidede, 2018; Nyasha & Odhiambo, 2017). The persistent interest may be due to the important role that finance plays in propelling growth; by mobilising excess liquidity in the system and allocating it to the most productive sectors of the economy in the most efficient manner (Ahmed & Wahid, 2011; Durusu-ciftci et al., 2017). However, after decades of extensive studies on the subject, the relationship between finance and growth remains inconclusive (An et al., 2020; Deb et al., 2019; Herwartz & Walle, 2014; Sehgal et al., 2012). Nyasha and Odhiambo (2019) described the relationship as complex and pointed out that the results varied depending on country-specific factors, the empirical model used, and the measure of financial development. Another factor that could account for the mixed results, but which has not been well researched, is the possibility that the impact of financial development on growth could vary across different sectors of the economy. While attention has been given to the relationship between financial development and growth, little is known about the impact of financial development on sectoral growth. Examining the impact of sectoral growth is more helpful than looking at the aggregate growth as different sectors could have different intensities of financial demands and productivity. Besides, policies on growth are initiated at the sectoral level, hence studying the impact of financial development at the sectoral level would be a handy tool to inform sector-level policies. Indeed, credit allocation has varied significantly across different sectors of the economy, with the agricultural sector being the most negatively affected despite the sector’s contribution to employment and livelihoods. According to the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (2017), the share of total credit to agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa was less than 1%. Financial institutions prefer to lend to the non-agricultural sector as they perceive agricultural activities to be too risky and the cost of extending credit is high as a result of multiple low-volume transactions. The situation is significantly the same across countries. For instance, credit allocated to the agricultural sector in Ghana for June 2019 was about 4% compared to 22% for the service sector (Bank of Ghana, 2019). Even in countries where agriculture’s contribution to GDP is over 50%, credit to the sector is skewed in favour of the trade sector which receives about 38% compared to 4.1% of the agricultural sector (Central Bank of Liberia, 2019). Further, in Burundi, the rate is less than 5% compared to 60% in the transport sector (African Development Bank, 2019). Hence, the impact of financial development could vary across different sectors of the economy. Another point worth noting is the fact that the productivity of capital could vary across the sectors. The return on investible projects could dictate which sector receives more credit. According to the Growth Research Programme (2015), the agricultural sector in sub-Saharan Africa is characterised by low productivity owing to low returns and perpetual risk of harvest failure. This vulnerability is due to the sector’s heavy reliance on rain which could fail and hence affect the outcome of any investment. In contrast, the service and industrial sectors may attract good projects and the environment may prove more conducive for such projects. Some have however argued that the service and industrial sectors are capital intensive and therefore the level of financial development would have to be higher to realise a positive effect on growth (see, for example, Daway-Ducanes & Gochoco-Bautista, 2019). This study seeks to contribute to the literature on the relationship between finance and growth in sub-Saharan Africa on two levels. First, previous studies (see, for instance, Aluko et al., 2020; An et al., 2020; Ho & Iyke, 2020; Ibrahim & Alagidede, 2018) focused on the impact of financial development on aggregate growth. This study complements existing literature by examining the impact of financial development on sectoral growth. Though there are some studies with a focus on sectoral growth, they rely either on a single measure of financial development or are country-specific (for example, Asaleye et al., 2018; Daway-Ducanes & Gochoco-Bautista, 2019; Ogbonna et al., 2020; Oliynyk-Dunn, 2017). This is significant because this study argues that the impact of financial development on growth may vary across different sectors of the economy. Hence, the evidence based on sectoral growth could help policymakers in shaping sector-specific policies aimed at enhancing the growth of various sectors. Second, the study seeks to contribute by employing the newly constructed financial development index devised by Svirydzenka (2016) to assess the relationship between financial Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 2 of 21 development and sectoral growth in the context of sub-Saharan Africa. The index is a comprehensive measure of financial development incorporating banking, stock market, insurance, mutual fund, pension fund indicators, among others. The financial sector has evolved beyond banking and stock markets (Svirydzenka, 2016). Therefore, the index better reflects the activities of financial intermediation in an economy relative to using a single measure. Measuring financial development has been an unresolved issue in the literature. How to accurately and comprehensively measure financial development is crucial for policymaking because the choice of measurement could result in a different impact on growth, leading to a misleading policy prescription (Demirguc-Kunt & Maksimovic, 2002). The study is therefore of significance to policymakers and practitioners in a number of ways. The rest of the article is organised as follows: section 2 presents a review of relevant literature, followed by section 3 which describes the methodology used, data and data sources. Section 4 presents results and analysis, while conclusions and policy implications are provided in the last section. 2. Review of literature Extensive theoretical and empirical literature on the impact of financial development on economic growth exists (Murari, 2017). Chuah and Thai (2004) identified four main lines of argument in the theoretical literature on the relationship between finance and growth. The first line of argument led by Schumpeter (1934) asserted that finance has a positive impact on growth by financing innovative ideas. McKinnon (1973) and Shaw (1973) developed a framework within which the financial sector increases growth by raising savings and investment. To achieve this, they called for liberalisation of interest rates and, as the real interest rate increases, the incentive to save also increases. Gurley and Shaw (1955) highlighted the role of financial institutions in directing surplus units to deficit units to promote growth. Bencivenga and Smith (1991) developed an endogenous equilibrium model in which the role of the bank is central in financial intermediation. They argued that financial intermediation affects growth through investment, where banks mobilise and direct savings into productive investment. King and Levine (1993) complemented this argument by explaining the role of finance in growth through an endogenous growth model. They argued that financial institutions help growth by screening potential projects of entrepreneurs and, through financial intermediation, mobilise finance to support the most productive economic activities and diversifying the risk associated with these economic activities. The second argument is the demand-following hypothesis which states that it is economic growth rather than financial development that leads to the emergence and development of the financial sector. This view was introduced by Robinson (1952), who argued that expansion in economic activities within an economy necessitates the presence of financial institutions to provide services essential for economic growth. Hence, growth leads, and finance follows. The third standpoint sought to combine the two arguments above and suggested the existence of a mutual relationship between finance and growth. Patrick (1966) put forward the stages of a development hypothesis where finance initially spurs economic growth, as suggested by the finance-leading or supply hypothesis. As growth is enhanced through expansion in economic activities, growth then supports finance, following the demand-leading hypothesis. This position is supported by Greenwood and Jovanovic (1990) who argued that there is an inextricable link between finance and growth. They explained that at the initial stage of development, the intermediation function played by finance promotes growth by encouraging a higher return on capital. At a later stage, the resultant growth supports the expansion of the financial structure. The final line of argument led by Lucas (1988) sought to suggest that the role of finance in the growth process has been overstretched and, hence, the impact of finance on growth is negligible. The empirical literature on the finance–growth relationship has been examined at the country and cross-country, levels. Evidence from earlier studies established a linear and positive relationship between financial development and growth (Benczúr et al., 2019). Goldsmith (1959) made Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 3 of 21 a pioneering contribution to the empirical examination of the finance–growth nexus. Using a sample of 35 countries, he found a positive correlation between finance and growth. Recent studies also reinforce the positive impact of finance on growth (for example, Türsoy & Faisal, 2018; Lenka & Sharma, 2020; Shravani & Sharma, 2020; Zeqiraj, Hammouhdeh, Iskenderoglu & Tiwari, 2020). There are, however, a few studies that have established either a negative or no relationship between finance and growth. For instance, Narayan and Narayan (2013) in a study of 65 countries across different regions in the world found bank credit to have a negative effect on growth while the stock market did not have any significant impact on growth. Further, Ayadi et al. (2013) focused on 11 Mediterranean countries over the period 1985–2009. These authors found the banking sector to be negatively related to economic growth. They, however, attributed the negative impact to the weak regulatory system. Other studies reported the impact of finance on growth to vary depending on the structure of the financial system, that is whether the financial system was a bank or market dominated. One of the earliest studies in this respect was Atje and Jovanovic (1993), who found the stock market rather than the banking sector to have a positive impact on growth. However, their sample contained both developed and developing countries. A line of studies has subsequently been done to confirm whether a market-based or bank-based financial system promotes growth (for example, Boadi et al., 2019; Ibrahim et al., 2017; Lee, 2012; Mahmood & Rehman, 2019). The evidence provided by Lee (2012) demonstrated that, though he found the stock market to drive growth in countries that are market-based and the banking sector to drive growth in bank-based countries, the banking sector affects growth positively at the early stages of development, while the stock market takes over as the economy advances. The study by Ibrahim et al. (2017) pointed to a significant positive effect of both banks and the stock market in driving growth. Their samples were however a mixture of both developed and developing countries. In a related study of 17 European countries over the period 1970–2013, Mahmood and Rehman (2019) reported both bank and market indicators to positively affect growth, but the impact of bank development was more persistent relative to the stock market. In another study, Boadi et al. (2019), using a sample of 60 countries, found support for the hypothesis that a market-based financial system drives growth relative to the banking sector. Yet, some found the impact of financial development on growth to vary based on income levels (see, for instance, Bist & Read, 2018; Deidda & Fattouh, 2002; Kim et al., 2012; Nguyen et al., 2019; Rahman et al., 2020; Sehgal et al., 2012). Sehgal et al. (2012) disaggregated their samples into lower-, middleand upper-income countries. They found the banking sector to drive growth across the three income groups, while the stock market only drives growth in the middleand upper-income countries. Similarly, Nguyen et al. (2019) identified the insurance sector to positively affect growth across income groups with the stock market only having a positive effect in middleand upper-income countries. They however established the effect of the banking sector on growth to be negative across income groups, where they suggested that credit extended could have been utilised on consumption instead of growth-enhancing projects. Further, some studies moved beyond the relationship to examine the possibility of a causal relationship between finance and growth, following Patrick’s (1966) demand-following and supply-leading hypothesis, but the results were mixed. In earlier studies, Calderón and Liu (2003) found finance rather to cause growth, while Ang and Mckibbin (2007) established causality running from growth to finance. Hsueh et al. (2013) noted that the direction of causality was sensitive to the choice of financial development variable, and while they found domestic credit to robustly lead growth, growth rather led when money supply measures were used in some cases. Pradhan et al. (2017), using different indicators, pointed to a mixed causal relationship. They established a uni-directional causality running from growth to finance when a banking indicator was used, while a bi-directional causality was established in the case of stock market, bond, and insurance market indicators. Deb et al. (2019) disaggregated their samples into developed and emerging economies using quarterly data over the period 1993–2014. Their results showed that in developed economies, finance drives growth in line with the supply-leading hypothesis, while the demand-following hypothesis rather exists in the case of emerging economies. Dash et al. (2020), using both insurance and bank development indicators, Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 4 of 21 provided evidence of long-run causality between financial development and growth. In the short run, they found a bi-directional relationship between insurance and growth and then again in banking and growth. They argued that a developed insurance industry helps in overcoming economic shocks while expansion in the economy leads to increase in income levels and, hence, an increase in demand for insurance. The new paradigm in literature, however, suggests that the relationship between finance and growth could be non-linear. In an influential paper, Cecchetti and Kharroubi (2012) established that finance has a positive impact on growth only up to a point, beyond which the impact of finance on growth becomes negative. This is known as the “too much finance” hypothesis. These authors asserted that the financial sector does not exist in isolation but rather competes with other sectors of the economy for scarce resources. Thus, as financial development increases, it begins to deprive the other sectors of the needed resources, and thus the negative effect. Subsequently, several related studies have been done in this direction, but with different approaches in estimating the threshold levels. While Soedarmono et al. (2017) used the square of financial development variable as a measure of a threshold, Tariq et al. (2020) employed the static Hansen’s threshold model in their study on Pakistan. However, the findings of both studies were mixed, whereas Soedarmono et al. (2017) showed that the effect of finance is positive but turns negative after attaining a certain threshold. Contrary to the too much finance hypothesis, Tariq et al. (2020) found the impact of finance to be initially negative but that it only becomes positive after attaining a certain threshold. Swamy and Dharani (2019) employed both the square term and Hansen’s threshold model in a sample of 24 developed countries for the period 1983–2013. They showed that above a threshold of 124%, the impact of finance on growth is negative. Law and Singh (2014) and Samargandi et al. (2015) used the Kremer et al. (2013) dynamic threshold model, which is an extension of Hansen’s static model. The findings of both studies supported the too much finance hypothesis. In a metaanalysis study by Bijlsma et al. (2018) covering 68 empirical studies, they concluded that the impact of finance on growth is positive but decreases over time in line with the too much finance hypothesis. Other studies have also looked at the impact of financial development at a sectoral level. Most of the studies were however conducted at country level and only examined a single sector. For instance, Shahbaz et al. (2013) and Oliynyk-Dunn (2017) found the impact of financial development on the agricultural sector to be positive in Pakistan and Ukraine. The study by Topcu and Çoban (2017) examined the causal relationship between finance and the industrial sector in Turkey and their findings support the supply-leading hypothesis. A recent study by Daway-Ducanes and GochocoBautista (2019) addressed the role of finance in the growth of the service and manufacturing sectors using a sample of 77 developing countries. They established a non-linear relationship in both sectors, with the impact of finance becoming positive only after attaining a certain threshold. They argued that because of the initial large and lumpy investment needed in these sectors, the level of financial development would have to rise to a certain point before positive results could be realised. In the sub-Saharan African context, different aspects of the finance–growth nexus have been examined either at the country level (Elijah & Hamza, 2019; Ho & Iyke, 2020) or cross-country level (An et al., 2020; Walle, 2014). Table 1 presents a summary of some of the recent empirical studies in Africa. The conclusions drawn by most of the studies show that finance has a positive impact on growth. Some studies, including Ahmed and Wahid (2011) and Nyasha and Odhiambo (2017), also addressed the issue of financial structure. A group of studies further looked at the possibility of causal relationships (for example, Aluko et al., 2020; Okunlola et al., 2020), but the results were mixed. In addition, some studies examined the non-linear relationship (see, for instance, Ibrahim & Alagidede, 2018; Taiwo, 2020). However, the existing studies have largely focused on aggregate growth with little evidence on whether the impact of finance could vary across different sectors of the economy. A notable exception is Asaleye et al. (2018) and Ogbonna et al. (2020). While Asaleye et al. (2018) only looked at the manufacturing sector in Nigeria, Ogbonna et al. (2020) disaggregated their growth measure into oil and non-oil growth. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 5 of 21 3. Materials and method 3.1. Theoretical model The study adopted the endogenous growth model following the framework proposed by Pagano (1993). The endogenous growth model relaxes the absorption of the exogeneity assumption of the neoclassical growth theory. The starting point of the model is the simple AK model specified as: Yt¼AKt(1) Where Yt is the aggregate output in a linear function of aggregate capital stock (Kt) and A captures the productivity of capital. The model further assumes that a single good is produced in the economy and hence capital can either be invested or consumed. If invested, capital is expected to depreciate at the rate δ per period given a level of gross investment, It: It¼Kt11δð ÞKt(2) The model further assumes a closed economy with no government intervention; hence the capital market is at equilibrium where gross savings St ð Þequals gross investment It ð Þ. Also, a proportion of savings 1  ;ð Þ is lost in the financial intermediation process, representing the cost of financial intermediation such as bank charges, fees for brokers and dealers, among others. The remaining amount is successfully channeled into investment as: ;St¼It(3) From equation 1, the growth rate at time t þ1 is given as: gtþ1¼Ytþ1 Yt1¼Ktþ1 Kt1 (4) Dropping the time indices from equation 2, the steady-state growth rate can be expressed in the final model as: g¼AI Yδ¼A;sδ(5) Pagano (1993) then identified three ways by which financial development could affect growth: first, finance can affect growth by raising the proportion of savings, ;which is expected to be channeled into investment. Second, it can increase the social marginal productivity of capital A; and, third, it can affect growth by increasing the rate of private savings, s. 3.2. Empirical model In line with the theoretical model, the study specified the models to be estimated as: SVAit ¼βSGit1þ;FDit þαXit þφiþeit (6) IVAit ¼βIGit1þ;FDit þαXit þφiþeit (7) AVAit ¼βAGit1þ;FDit þαXit þφiþeit (8) Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 6 of 21 Table 1. A summary of recent studies on the relationship between finance and growth in SubSaharan Africa Author(s) Type of study Econometric model used Number of countries A measure of financial development Summary of findings Ahmed and Wahid (2011) Panel (1986–2007) FMOLS 7 value of shares traded, private credit and stock market capitalization. Stock market positively affects growth through efficiency and productivity while the banking institution impacts growth through capital accumulation. Demetriades and James (2011) Panel (1975–2006) Westerlund cointegration 18 Bank deposit, liquid liability and private credit. Evidence of demand-led hypothesis. Walle (2014) Panel (1975–2005) Westerlund cointegration and DOLS 17 Liquid liability and private credit, A long-run relationship exists and causality running from finance to growth. Acaravci, Ozturk and Acaravci (2009) Panel (1975–2005) GMM and Pedroni cointegration 24 Domestic credit by the banking sector, private credit and liquid liability. The direction of causality depends on the measure of financial development. Aluko et al. (2020) Panel (1990–2015) Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) panel causality test model 33 Financial development index Bidirectional relationship between finance and growth. An et al. (2020) Panel (1985–2015) FE and RE models. Granger causality test 30 Liquid liability, broad money supply, domestic credit by banks to private sector and interest read spread The difference depends on the income; negative impact in countries with low income while it is positive in the case of higherincome countries. Elijah and Hamza (2019) Timeseries (1981–2015) VECM Nigeria Broad money supply, Existence of positive longrun relationship but turns negative after accounting for a structural break. (Continued) Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 7 of 21 respectively. The estimated thresholds were 67% for the service sector and 39% for the agricultural sector, which are higher compared to financial development. This is to be expected given that financial intermediation in sub-Saharan Africa is bank-driven relative to the stock market. Above these thresholds, an increase in financial development by 1% led to an increase in service growth by 0.28% and 0.50% for the agricultural sector. Similarly, the impact of financial institutions on industry was negative, while their square showed a positive relationship. An increase in the level of financial institution led to a reduction of 0.29% on industry growth, while an increase in the square of the financial institution by a percentage point led to an increase in industry growth by 0.003%. This suggests that for financial institutions to have a positive impact on industrial growth, it must rise above a threshold of 52%. The evidence for the financial markets was similar relative to that of financial institutions. Significantly, financial markets had a positive impact on service and agricultural sectors. An increase in financial markets by 1% led to a 0.44% increase in service and 0.21% in agricultural growth. Above a threshold of 25% a percentage increase in financial markets resulted in a decrease of service growth by 0.009%. The estimated threshold for the agricultural sector is 19%, above which, a percentage increase in financial markets led to a fall in agricultural growth by 0.01%. Consistent with the findings on financial development, the impact of financial markets on industry Table 5. Financial development and sectoral growthGMM model Variables Service Agriculture Industry Lagged dependent variable 0.838*** 0.816*** 0.765*** (0.0736) (0.0934) (0.0682) Investment −0.0995** −0.0455** 0.119*** (0.0436) (0.0189) (0.0461) Consumption 0.108** −0.0650** −0.0416 (0.0502) (0.0325) (0.0450) Trade-openness −0.0213* −0.0149 0.0400*** (0.0127) (0.0135) (0.0138) Labour −0.0251 0.00347 0.0477 (0.0299) (0.0221) (0.0299) FinDI 0.339** 0.189* −0.532*** (0.143) (0.101) (0.126) FinDI square −0.00359* −0.00298* 0.00614*** (0.00206) (0.00158) (0.00177) Constant 0.000 0.000 8.546** (0.000) (0.000) (3.521) Diagnostics: Observations 387 387 387 Number of countries 43 43 43 Instruments 25 27 27 Year dummy Yes Yes Yes Income dummy Yes Yes Yes Hansen chi-square (p-value) 4.50(0.213) 6.99 (0.222) 8.37 (0.137) AR(1): Z(p-value) −3.07(0.002) −3.04(0.002) −2.46(0.014) AR(2): Z(p-value) 1.51(0.132) 1.63 (0.102) 1.38 (0.168) Note: Robust standard errors in parentheses, *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, and * p < 0.1 refers to significant levels at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively. FinDI is financial development index. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 14 of 21 growth was negative while the square was positive. Thus, for financial markets to have a positive impact on industrial growth, its level must rise to 29%. The thresholds for the financial markets are lower relative to both the overall financial development and financial institutions, reflecting the underdeveloped nature of financial markets in the region. Table 6. Financial structure and sectoral growthGMM model Variables Financial institutions Financial markets Service Agriculture Industry Service Agriculture Industry Lagged dependent 0.824*** 0.945*** 0.928*** 0.868*** 0.805*** 0.810*** (0.0905) (0.0842) (0.0435) (0.104) (0.0797) (0.0873) Investment −0.121*** −0.0585** 0.130*** −0.0920* −0.0605** 0.111* (0.0420) (0.0232) (0.0431) (0.0498) (0.0306) (0.0658) Consumption 0.0866* −0.0783** −0.00158 0.135 −0.0519 −0.118* (0.0522) (0.0374) (0.0360) (0.0936) (0.0369) (0.0624) Tradeopenness −0.0229 −0.00800 0.0159* −0.0214 −0.0157* 0.0339*** (0.0151) (0.0103) (0.00916) (0.0170) (0.00955) (0.0126) Labour −0.0244 −0.0220 0.00505 0.0138 0.00460 −0.0123 (0.0330) (0.0255) (0.0191) (0.0365) (0.0196) (0.0236) FII 0.278*** 0.498*** −0.293*** (0.0992) (0.177) (0.0858) FII square −0.00207* −0.00636** 0.00281** (0.00118) (0.00258) (0.00111) FMI 0.439*** 0.210** −0.316*** (0.146) (0.105) (0.0998) FMI square −0.00897** −0.00555* 0.00554*** (0.00351) (0.00286) (0.00185) Constant 0 0 0 0 8.968** 5.158 (0) (0) (0) (0) (4.236) (4.028) Diagnostics: Observations 387 387 387 315 315 315 Number of countries 43 43 43 36 36 36 Instruments 25 27 29 30 28 27 Year dummy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Income dummy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Hansen chisquare (p-value) 5.87(0.118) 8.92(0.112) 11.48(0.119) 8.46(0.390) 8.71(0.190) 6.16(0.291) AR (1): Z (p-value) −3.11(0.002) −3.05(0.002) −2.53(0.012) −2.63(0.009) −3.13(0.002) −2.29(0.022) AR (2): Z (p-value) 1.53(0.126) 1.49(0.137) 1.41(0.159) 1.41(0.158) 1.78(0.076) 1.24(0.216) Note: Robust standard errors in parentheses, *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, and * p < 0.1 refers to significant levels at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively. FII is the financial institution index and FMI is the financial markets index. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 15 of 21 4.4. Robustness check To further validate the consistency of the findings of this study, the same models were estimated using the seemingly unrelated regression (SUR). The SUR can account for intersectoral linkages (Avery, 1977) where sectoral growth (dependent variables) in service, industry and agriculture are treated as endogenous variables and are simultaneously estimated. Thus, equations 6, 7 and 8 were simultaneously estimated. The results relating to the impact of financial development on sectoral growth are shown in Table 7. Indeed, the evidence showed that financial development had a positive impact on service and agricultural growth, while the impact was negative for industrial growth. The square of financial development, however, was positively related to industrial growth, while a negative relation was found in the case of the service and agricultural sectors. This is consistent with the results of the main GMM model. The findings relating to the impact of financial structure on sectoral growth is displayed in Table 8. The evidence for the financial institutions partly corroborated the main results where the financial institution was found to have a significant positive impact on service growth and a significant negative impact on industrial growth. Financial markets were shown to have a significant positive effect on the agricultural sector, while the relationship was significantly negative with the industrial sector. The square of financial markets pointed to a threshold effect across the three sectors. This is also in line with the results in the main GMM model though the sign for the service sector in the SUR model is positive. Thus, the impact of financial structure varies across different sectors. Table 8. Financial structure and sectoral growthSUR model Variables Financial institutions Financial markets Service Agriculture Industry Service Agriculture Industry Investment 0.00472 −0.165*** 0.160*** −0.0518 −0.119* 0.171*** (0.0480) (0.0545) (0.0485) (0.0585) (0.0616) (0.0588) Consumption 0.288*** −0.363*** 0.0740 0.428*** −0.213** −0.215** (0.0727) (0.0825) (0.0734) (0.0997) (0.105) (0.100) Tradeopenness −0.0760*** −0.0349* 0.111*** −0.0540** −0.0653*** 0.119*** (0.0177) (0.0201) (0.0178) (0.0228) (0.0240) (0.0229) Labour −0.255*** 0.110** 0.145*** −0.0554 0.0544 0.00114 (0.0435) (0.0494) (0.0440) (0.0577) (0.0609) (0.0580) FII 0.625*** −0.138 −0.485*** −0.0980 1.069*** −0.972*** (0.150) (0.170) (0.151) (0.177) (0.186) (0.178) FII square −0.00105 0.00173 −0.000692 0.0106** −0.0255*** 0.0149*** (0.00207) (0.00235) (0.00209) (0.00445) (0.00469) (0.00447) Constant 53.30*** 39.74*** 6.939* 45.75*** 39.21*** 15.03*** (3.662) (4.158) (3.699) (4.552) (4.799) (4.576) Diagnostics: Observations 426 426 426 349 349 349 R-squared 0.372 0.583 0.553 0.260 0.615 0.499 Year dummy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Income dummy Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Note: Robust standard errors in parentheses, *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, and * p < 0.1 refers to significant levels at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively. FII is financial institution index and FMI is financial markets index. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 16 of 21 5. Conclusion and policy implications The role of financial development in economic growth has been extensively examined. By disaggregating value addition into agriculture, service, and industry, the study examines whether the impact of financial development varies across sectors of the economy. Using the Generalised Method of Moments and covering 44 sub-Saharan African countries over the period 1990–2018, the results revealed that financial sector development could spur the growth of service and agricultural sectors but only up to a threshold of 47.2% and 31.7% respectively, beyond these points financial development could serve as a drag on the growth of these sectors. The findings showed that financial development could positively affect industrial growth only after attaining a threshold of 43.3%. Thus, the study finds support for the too much finance hypothesis in the case of service and agricultural sectors while too little finance was established with respect to the industrial sector. The result is robust even after accounting for intersectoral linkages using the Seemingly Unrelated Regression model. Another key finding is that financial structure matters in explaining sectoral value addition as the impact of financial institutions and markets vary across sectors. The findings have some implications for policymakers in sub-Saharan Africa and developing countries with similar features. Policymakers should consider the optimal level of financial development when formulating sectoral growth policies. To maximise the benefits associated with industrialisation, there is a need to promote development of the financial sector as the results showed that financial development could affect industrial growth only at a higher threshold. The analysis further revealed that financial structure matter, hence there is the need for policies to develop both financial institutions and financial markets. Using financial development data on a sectoral basis could have added to the novelty of this study and policy recommendation; however, the study was limited by the lack of longitudinal data on this variable. Future studies that employ longer time series data on sectoral financial development indicators are needed to add further insights to the finance–growth literature. Table 7. Financial development and sectoral growthSUR model Variables Service Agriculture Industry Investment 0.0294 −0.174*** 0.144*** (0.0495) (0.0542) (0.0481) Consumption 0.409*** −0.390*** −0.0191 (0.0726) (0.0795) (0.0705) Trade-openness −0.0769*** −0.0438** 0.121*** (0.0184) (0.0202) (0.0179) Labour −0.246*** 0.0850* 0.162*** (0.0448) (0.0491) (0.0435) FinDI 0.739*** 0.409** −1.148*** (0.179) (0.196) (0.174) FinDI square −0.00273 −0.00666* 0.00937*** (0.00313) (0.00343) (0.00304) Constant 54.02*** 37.61*** 8.358** (3.665) (4.017) (3.561) Diagnostics: Observations 426 426 426 R-squared 0.332 0.586 0.560 Year dummy Yes Yes Yes Income dummy Yes Yes Yes Note: Robust standard errors in parentheses, *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, and * p < 0.1 refers to significant levels at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively. FinDI is financial development index. Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 17 of 21 Funding The authors received no direct funding for this research. Author details Yazidu Ustarz 1 E-mail: [email protected] ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4356-7608 Ashenafi Beyene Fanta 1 1 University of Stellenbosch Business School, South Africa. Citation information Cite this article as: Financial development and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: A sectoral perspective, Yazidu Ustarz & Ashenafi Beyene Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976. Notes 1. The sectoral classification of value addition follows the International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC). Agriculture covers forestry, fishing, hunting, cultivation of crops, and livestock production. Services include wholesale and retail trade (including hotels and restaurants), transport, and government, financial, professional, and personal services such as education, healthcare, and real estate services. The industrial sector comprises value added in mining, manufacturing (also reported as a separate subgroup), construction, electricity, water, and gas. 2. FII: Access: Commercial bank branches per 100,000 adults, and ATMs per 100,000 adults. Depth: Private sector credit to GDP, pension fund assets to GDP, mutual fund assets to GDP, and life and non-life insurance premiums to GDP. Efficiency: Net interest margin, lending-deposit spread, non-interest income to total income, overhead costs to total assets, return on assets and return on equity. FMI: Access: Percent of stock market capitalisation outside the top 10 largest companies, the total number of debt security issuers. Depth: In percent of GDP: Stock market capitalisation, stock market turnover, international government debt securities outstanding, and total debt securities outstanding of private non-financial corporations. Efficiency: Stock market turnover ratio (adopted from Svirydzenka, 2016). 3. The threshold values are calculated as: Cofficient of financial development/-2(Cofficient of square of financial development). References Acaravci, A. (2009). Financial development and economic growth: Literature survey and empirical evidence from sub-Saharan African countries. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 12 (1), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v12i1.258 African Development Bank. (2019) . Republic of Burundi country strategy paper 2019–2023. Ahmed, A. D., & Wahid, A. N. M. (2011). Financial structure and economic growth link in African countries: A panel cointegration analysis. Journal of Economic Studies, 38(3), 331–357. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 01443581111152436 Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa. (2017). Africa agriculture status report: The business of smallholder agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa (Issue 5). Aluko, O. A., Adeyeye, O. P., & Oladele, P. O. (2020). Finance–growth nexus in sub-Saharan Africa revisited: Evidence based on a new composite index. Economic Change and Restructuring, 53(2), 333–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-019-09253-9 An, H., Zou, Q., & Kargbo, M. (2020). Impact of financial development on economic growth: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Australian Economic Papers, 68 (June), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.12201 Ang, J. B., & Mckibbin, W. J. (2007). Financial liberalization, financial sector development and growth : Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Development Economics, 84(1), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2006.11.006 Apergis, N., & Poufinas, T. (2020). The role of insurance growth in economic growth: Fresh evidence from a panel of OECD countries. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 53(March), 1–16. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.najef.2020.101217 Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968 Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 58, 277–297. https:// doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D Asaleye, A. J., Adama, J. I., & Ogunjobi, J. O. (2018). Financial sector and manufacturing sector performance: Evidence from Nigeria. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 15(3), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.15(3).2018.03 Atje, R., & Jovanovic, B. (1993). Stock markets and development. European Economic Review, 37(2–3), 632–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(93) 90053-D Avery, R. B. (1977). Error components and seemingly unrelated regressions. Econometrica, 45(1), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913296 Ayadi, R., Arbak, E., Ben-naceur, S., & Groen, W. P. (2013). Financial development, bank efficiency and economic growth across the Mediterranean. MEDPRO Technical Report No. 30/March. European Commission. Bank of Ghana. (2019). Banking sector report July 2019, Bank of Ghana. Beck, T., Levine, R., & Loayza, N. (2000). Finance and the sources of growth. Journal of Financial Economics, 58 (1–2), 261–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-405x (00)00072-6 Bencivenga, V. R., & Smith, B. D. (1991). Financial intermediation and endogenous growth. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 195–209. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2297964 Benczúr, P., Karagiannis, S., & Kvedaras, V. (2019). Finance and economic growth: Financing structure and non-linear impact. Journal of Macroeconomics, 62, 103048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2018.08.001 Bijlsma, M., Kool, C., & Non, M. (2018). The effect of financial development on economic growth: A meta-analysis. Applied Economics, 50(57), 6128–6148. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00036846.2018.1489503 Bist, J. P., & Read, R. (2018). Financial development and economic growth: Evidence from a panel of 16 African and non-African low-income countries. Cogent Economics and Finance, 6(1), 1. https://doi. org/10.1080/23322039.2018.1449780 Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115–143. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8 Boadi, I., Osarfo, D., & Boadi, P. (2019). Bank-based and market-based development and economic growth: An international investigation. Studies in Economics and Finance, 36(3), 365–394. https://doi.org/10.1108/ SEF-12-2017-0346 Calderón, C., & Liu, L. (2003). The direction of causality between financial development and economic growth. Journal of Development Economics, 72(1), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(03)00079-8 Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 18 of 21 Cecchetti, S., & Kharroubi, E. (2012). Reassessing the impact of finance on growth. BIS Working Paper No. 381:1–21. Central Bank of Liberia. (2019). Annual report, 2019, Bank of Liberia. Chuah, H. L., & Thai, V.-C. (2004). Financial development and economic growth: Evidence from causality tests for the GCC countries. IMF Working Paper No. 04/XX. Dash, S., Pradhan, R. P., Mardana, R. P., Gaurav, K., & JJayakumar, M. (2020). Impact of banking sector development on insurance market–growth nexus: The study of Eurozone countries. Empirica, 47(2), 205–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-018-9412-z Daway-Ducanes, S. L. S., & Gochoco-Bautista, M. S. (2019). Manufacturing and services growth in developing economies: “Too Little” Finance? Progress in Development Studies, 19(1), 55–82. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1464993418807585 Deb, S. G., Mishra, S., & Banerjee, P. (2019). Stock market, banking sector and economic growth: A cross-country analysis over different economic cycles. Studies in Economics and Finance, 36(3), 348–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEF-02-2017-0046 Deidda, L., & Fattouh, B. (2002). Non-linearity between finance and growth. Econometric Letters, 74(3), 339–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(01) 00571-7 Demetriades, P.O. & James, G. A. (2011). Finance and growth in Africa: The broken link, Economics Letters, 113(3), 263-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. econlet.2011.08.007 Demirguc-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2002). Funding growth in bank-based and market-based financial systems: Evidence from firm-level data. Journal of Financial Economics, 65(3), 337–363. https://doi.org/ 10.1679/aohc.65.337 Durusu-ciftci, D., Ispir, M. S., & Yetkiner, H. (2017). Financial development and economic growth: Some theory and more evidence. Journal of Policy Modeling, 39(2), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod. 2016.08.001 Ehigiamusoe, K. U., Lean, H. H., & Lee, C. C. (2019). Moderating effect of inflation on the finance–growth nexus: Insights from West African countries. Empirical Economics, 57(2), 399–422. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00181-018-1442-7 Ehigiamusoe, U. K., Lean, H. H., & Badeeb, R. A. (2017). Finance-growth nexus in cote D’ivoire and Nigeria: Does the proxy of financial development matter? Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 25 (1), 401–415 Elijah, S., & Hamza, N. (2019). The relationship between financial sector development and economic growth in Nigeria: Cointegration with structural break approach. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(5), 1081–1088. https://doi. org/10.35940/ijeat.E1153.0585C19 Fanta, A. B. (2017). Bond markets, stock markets, banks and growth: A system GMM analysis. Global Business and Economics Review, 19(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/ 10.1504/GBER.2017.080779 Fowowe, B. (2011). The finance-growth nexus in subSaharan Africa: Panel cointegration and causality tests. International Development, 231, 220–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.1660 Fufa, T., & Kim, J. (2018). Financial development, economic growth and convergence clubs. Applied Economics, 50(60), 6512–6528. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00036846.2018.1489521 Goldsmith, R. W. (1959). Financial structure and development as a subject for international comparative study. In The Comparative Study of Economic Growth and Structure (pp. 114-123). NBER. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IJMF-07-2016-0131 Greenwood, J., & Jovanovic, B. (1990). Financial development, growth, and the distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 1076–1107. https://doi. org/10.1086/261720 Growth Research Programme. (2015). Raising agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa. Gurley, J. G., & Shaw, E. S. (1955). Financial aspects of economic development. The American Economic Review, 45(4), 515–538. http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 1811632 Hansen, L. P. (1982). Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50(4), 1029–1054. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912775 Herwartz, H., & Walle, Y. M. (2014). Openness and the finance–growth nexus. Journal of Banking and Finance, 48(C), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jbankfin.2014.06.031 Ho, S. Y., & Iyke, B. N. (2020). The determinants of economic growth in Ghana: New empirical evidence. Global Business Review, 21(3), 626–644. https://doi. org/10.1177/0972150918779282 Hou, H., & Cheng, S. Y. (2017). The dynamic effects of banking, life insurance, and stock markets on economic growth. Japan and the World Economy, 41(C), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2017.02.001 Hsueh, S. J., Hu, Y. H., & Tu, C. H. (2013). Economic growth and financial development in Asian countries: A bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis. Economic Modelling, 32(1), 294–301. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.02.027 Ibrahim, M., & Alagidede, P. (2018). Nonlinearities in financial development – Economic growth nexus: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Research in International Business and Finance, 46(C), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.11.001 Ibrahim, S., Abdullahi, A., Azman-Saini, W. M. Z., & Rahman, M. A. (2017). Finance–growth nexus: Evidence based on new measures of finance. International Journal of Economics and Management, 11(1), 17–29. Kim, D., Lin, S., & Suen, Y. (2012). The simultaneous evolution of economic growth, financial development, and trade openness. Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 21(4), 513–537. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2010.497933 King, R. G., & Levine, R. (1993). Finance, entrepreneurship, theory and evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics, 32(3), 513–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/03043932(93)90028-E Kremer, S., Bick, A., & Nautz, D. (2013). Inflation and growth: New evidence from a dynamic panel threshold analysis. Empirical Economics, 44(2), 861–878. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00181-012-0553-9 Law, S. H., & Singh, N. (2014). Does too much finance harm economic growth? Journal of Banking and Finance, 41(C), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbank fin.2013.12.020 Lee, B. (2012). Bank-based and market-based financial systems: Time-series evidence. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 20(2), 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pac fin.2011.07.006 Lenka, S. K., & Sharma, R. (2020). Re-examining the effect of financial development on economic growth in India: Does the measurement of financial development matter? Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 21(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10599231.2020.1745050 Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7 Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 19 of 21 Mahmood, M., & Rehman, K. U. (2019). Did capital market development and financial depth contribute to growth? Evidence from European financial integration. European Review, 27(4), 506–518. https:// doi.org/10.1017/S1062798719000164 McKinnon, R. I. (1973). Money and capital in economic development. The Brooking Institution. Meniago, C., & Lartey, E. K. K. (2020). Does FDI affect productivity and growth in sub-Saharan Africa? Journal of African Business, 22(2), 1–19. https://doi. org/10.1080/15228916.2020.1745011 Murari, K. (2017). Financial development – Economic growth nexus: Evidence from South Asian middleincome countries. Global Business Review, 18(4), 924–935. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0972150917692245 Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2013). The short-run relationship between the financial system and economic growth: New evidence from regional panels. International Review of Financial Analysis, 29(C), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2013.03.012 Nguyen, Y. N., Brown, K., & Skully, M. (2019). Impact of finance on growth: Does it vary with development levels or cyclical conditions? Journal of Policy Modeling, 41(6), 1195–1209. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jpolmod.2019.05.006 Nyasha, S., & Odhiambo, N. M. (2017). Banks, stock market development and economic growth in Kenya: An empirical investigation. Journal of African Business, 18 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228916.2016. 1216232 Nyasha, S., & Odhiambo, N. M. (2019). Financial development and economic growth nexus: A rejoinder to Tsionas. Economic Notes, 48(2), 1–3. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ecno.12136 Ogbonna, O. E., Mobosi, I. A., & Ugwuoke, O. W. (2020). Economic growth in an oil dominant economy of Nigeria: The role of financial systems development. Cogent Economics and Finance, 8(1), 1810390. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2020.1810390 Okunlola, O. A., Masade, E. O., Lukman, A. F., & Abiodun, S. A. (2020). Investigating causal relationship between financial development indicators and economic growth: Toda and Yamamoto approach. Iranian Economic Review, 24(1), 225–246. https://doi. org/10.22059/ier.2020.74480 Olaniyi, C. O., & Oladeji, S. I. (2020). Moderating the effect of institutional quality on the finance–growth nexus: Insights from West African countries. Economic Change and Restructuring, 54(1), 43–74. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10644-020-09275-8 Oliynyk-Dunn, O. (2017). Financial system and agricultural growth in Ukraine. Organizacija, 50(3), 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1515/orga-2017-0016 Pagano, M. (1993). Financial markets and growth. An overview. European Economic Review, 37(2–3), 613–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(93)90051-B Patrick, H. T. (1966). Financial development and economic growth in underdeveloped countries. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 14(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1086/450153 Pradhan, R. P., Arvin, M. B., Bahmani, S., Hall, J., & Norman, N. R. (2017). Finance and growth: Evidence from the ARF countries. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 66(C), 136–148. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.qref.2017.01.011 Rahman, A., Khan, M. A., & Charfeddine, L. (2020). Financial development – Economic growth nexus in Pakistan: New evidence from the Markov switching model. Cogent Economics and Finance, 8(1), 1716446. https:// doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2020.1716446 Robinson, J. (1952). The generalization of the general theory. In The rate of interest and other essays (pp. 67–142). MacMillanPublishing Company. Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in stata. Stata Journal, 9(1), 86–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1536867X0900900106 Samargandi, N., Fidrmuc, J., & Ghosh, S. (2015). Is the relationship between financial development and economic growth monotonic? Evidence from a sample of middle-income countries. World Development, 68(C), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. worlddev.2014.11.010 Sargan, J. D. (1958). The estimation of economic relationships using instrumental variables. Econometrica, 26(3), 393–415. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907619 Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development – An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Regional Studies. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Sehgal, S., Ahmad, W., & Deisting, F. (2012). A re-assessment of the role of the financial sector in driving economic growth: Recent evidence from cross country data. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5(1), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v5n1p133 Shahbaz, M., Shabbir, M. S., & Butt, M. S. (2013). Effect of financial development on agricultural growth in Pakistan: New extensions from bounds test to level relationships and Granger causality tests. International Journal of Social Economics, 40(8), 707–728. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-01-2012-0002 Shaw, E. S. (1973). Financial deepening in economic development. Oxford University Press. Shravani, S., & Sharma, S. K. (2020). Financial development and economic growth in selected Asian economies: A dynamic panel ARDL test. Contemporary Economics, 14(2), 201–218. https://doi. org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.400 Soedarmono, W., Hasan, I., & Arsyad, N. (2017). Nonlinearity in the finance–growth nexus: Evidence from Indonesia. International Economics, 150(December), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2016.11.003 Svirydzenka, K. (2016). Introducing a new broad-based index of financial development. IMF Working Papers. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513583709.001. Swamy, V., & Dharani, M. (2019). The dynamics of finance– growth nexus in advanced economies. International Review of Economics and Finance, 64(June), 122–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2019.06.001 Taiwo, A. (2020). Financial development, real sector and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: The threshold effect. Journal of African Business, 1–24. https:// doi.org/10.1080/15228916.2020.1773608 Tariq, R., Khan, M. A., & Rahman, A. (2020). How does financial development impact economic growth in Pakistan? New evidence from threshold model. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(8), 161–173. https:// doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO8.161 Topcu, M., & Çoban, S. (2017). Financial development and firm growth in Turkish manufacturing industry: Evidence from heterogeneous panel based non-causality test. Economic Research – Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 30(1), 1758–1769. https://doi.org/10. 1080/1331677X.2017.1383179 Türsoy, T., & Faisal, F. (2018). Does financial depth impact economic growth in North Cyprus? Financial Innovation, 4(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854018-0096-y Walle, Y. M. (2014). Revisiting the finance–growth nexus in sub-Saharan Africa: Results from error correctionbased panel cointegration tests. African Development Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 20 of 21 Review, 26(2), 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/ 1467-8268.12083 Wooldridge, J. M. (2003). Introductory econometrics, A modern approach (2nd ed.). Thomson, SouthWestern. Zeqiraj, V., Hammoudeh, S., Iskenderoglu, O. & Tiwari, A.K. (2020). Banking sector performance and economic growth: Evidence from Southeast European countries. Post-Communist Economies, 32(2), 267–284. https:// doi:10.1080/14631377.2019.1640988 © 2021 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license. You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. No additional restrictions You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. Cogent Economics & Finance (ISSN: 2332-2039) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group. Publishing with Cogent OA ensures: • Immediate, universal access to your article on publication • High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online • Download and citation statistics for your article • Rapid online publication • Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards • Retention of full copyright of your article • Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article • Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com Ustarz & Fanta, Cogent Economics & Finance (2021), 9: 1934976 https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1934976 Page 21 of 21